Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[gmca]

59 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I’m not making light of  what happened or supporting him but, apparently, he still maintains it was consensual and, if that’s correct, he can’t apologise. Obviously, the judge didn’t believe him.

It was quite clearly explained by the judge why he considered it wasn't consensual in his opinion. Goodwillie has every right not to agree with the judge's opinion, but it would have done him some good to acknowledge the reasoning behind the judge's decision, or at least show some empathy towards womens' right to give informed consent. That could have been done without him explicitly apologising.

[Dawson Park Boy]

2 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

This is just fucking horseshit, m8.

Even if he maintains it was consensual, he can say something along the lines of “I accept that my actions that night, while not criminal, have caused a lot of pain and for that I apologise”

Even Ched Evans managed that.

There’s also the fact that he’s obviously, definitely lying. 

I’d accept that he could have said something along those lines.

Fair enough.

Anyway, it’s RR’s problem now.

[razamanaz]

 Nicola doing her best to outdoo Boris for the biggest clown title

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60261400

[Todd_is_God]

2 hours ago, razamanaz said:

 Nicola doing her best to outdoo Boris for the biggest clown title

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60261400

I still don't understand why just opening the door isn't an option.

[Bairnardo]

I still don't understand why just opening the door isn't an option.

Because this was the first idea they shat out, and backing down has ceased to be an option.

[Todd_is_God]

44 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

52 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I still don't understand why just opening the door isn't an option.

Because this was the first idea they shat out, and backing down has ceased to be an option.

I don't believe it was the first - opening the door must have been that - but it's certainly one the leaves a visual reminder for years to come of how they just cared so much that they did something.

[Abdul_Latif]

2 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't believe it was the first - opening the door must have been that - but it's certainly one the leaves a visual reminder for years to come of how they just cared so much that they did something.

Exactly that. Many suggested a tunnel should replace the Forth Bridge, but a tunnel isn’t a visual masterpiece that shows just what they did, so it was dismissed very quickly.

[BFTD]

Always an eye-opener when the Covid thread spills out into the wild.

[welshbairn]

51 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Always an eye-opener when the Covid thread spills out into the wild.

Close the doors quick! Oh no, where did that gap come from...?

[Salt n Vinegar]

4 hours ago, BFTD said:

Always an eye-opener when the Covid thread spills out into the wild.

Pity there's no vaccine available against infected threads. 

[spongeheid15]

[Suspect Device]

3 hours ago, spongeheid15 said:

 

Congratulations on managing to crop it this time.

Still a bit shit effort. The head just looks wrong. Must try harder.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Comfortably the best one so far. Still a 4/10 effort though.

[Hard Graft]

Whatever happened to the state owned non profit making energy company she promised us a couple of years ago?  Surely that will help everyone out and be a vote winner.  Nicola wouldn't lie would she?

[Suspect Device]

You've got to love the Express. What a shite paper.

Parents' fury at Sturgeon's £500-plus pens... while kids are still waiting for free laptops - Scottish Daily Express

Parents are furious and writing to their Tory MP's about Nippy's expensive pens, apparently. That was their headline story today. 

[Salt n Vinegar]

14 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Energy prices hike: 'Lives could be lost' - Michael Matheson - BBC News

Tell Nicola bud, she's the one who, in the face of this increase in energy prices, has just legally forced every household to spend £200+ installing connected fire alarms in our houses that the majority of us don't need or want. Mummy Nic  knows best though eh?

That money would certainly have covered any increase in energy bills over this winter.

The "majority" of us will never have our lives saved by crumple zones, seat belts or airbags.  Should we abolish all safety rules just because the "need or want" might never apply to us as individuals? 

Seems a pretty good deal to me. £200 or less to save the lives of everyone in a family?

Fair enough for the folk who can't afford heating or food to complain about the cost, but I suspect that most P&B members spend more than that on pints and takeaways in a month. 

[BFTD]

2 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

The "majority" of us will never have our lives saved by crumple zones, seat belts or airbags.  Should we abolish all safety rules just because the "need or want" might never apply to us as individuals? 

Seems a pretty good deal to me. £200 or less to save the lives of everyone in a family?

Fair enough for the folk who can't afford heating or food to complain about the cost, but I suspect that most P&B members spend more than that on pints and takeaways in a month. 

Not to mention that the OP has repeatedly proven that he couldn't give less of a shit about people struggling with money anyway.

Fucking virtue signallers  

[Bairnardo]

5 hours ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

The "majority" of us will never have our lives saved by crumple zones, seat belts or airbags.  Should we abolish all safety rules just because the "need or want" might never apply to us as individuals? 

Seems a pretty good deal to me. £200 or less to save the lives of everyone in a family?

Fair enough for the folk who can't afford heating or food to complain about the cost, but I suspect that most P&B members spend more than that on pints and takeaways in a month. 

Whats this based on mate, and why were pints and takeaways selected? 

[Salt n Vinegar]

30 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Hmmm. Is starvation or freezing to death (as warned is highly likely by the SNP minister) or the hypothetical risk of a fire a bigger threat to people on the breadline right now?

People are required by law to make this change regardless of whether or not they already have perfectly functioning fire alarms in their houses.

If people are at risk of dying right now, as is being claimed by that SNP minister, the SNP have legitimate questions to answer about their role in that.

This is on the SNP bud. You can't blame the Tories for everything. That one-trick pony of blaming Boris is getting pretty old.

Remarkable response.  I expressed concerns for the poorer among us, and didn't refer to the Tories. 

Apart from that you almost had a point. 

A quick Google found an article from June last year stating that in the previous 12 months 46 out of 53 fire fatalities resulted from house fires. Not particularly 'theoretical' for them, their friends and families. 

(source - https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/shock-fire-deaths-double-twelve-24325967) 

I'll leave it to others to give a view on other sorts of alarms, but I dare say that some might well consider that they don't need them, or even any alarm at all.  They might change their minds if insurance companies vary premiums depending on what's in the property.  Some might be content with a brass gong, for all I know.  I do know that one of our elderly neighbours tried to change the battery in her older type of alarm, and had a nasty fall. That older sort with roughly annual battery change requirements clearly have issues for the infirm. 

(Confession time... we didn't order our new alarms early enough to meet the start date,   but they'll be here soon.)

Edit to add... Of course, the responsibility for installing the new alarms rests with the landlords - public and private sectors - not with their tenants. 

Edited February 7, 2022 by Salt n Vinegar

[jakedee]

Hmmm. Is starvation or freezing to death (as warned is highly likely by the SNP minister) or the hypothetical risk of a fire a bigger threat to people on the breadline right now?
People are required by law to make this change regardless of whether or not they already have perfectly functioning fire alarms in their houses.
If people are at risk of dying right now, as is being claimed by that SNP minister, the SNP have legitimate questions to answer about their role in that.
This is on the SNP bud. You can't blame the Tories for everything. That one-trick pony of blaming Boris is getting pretty old.

I would imagine (I know it's not exclusive) that the majority of people who are choosing whether to heat or eat, and are at risk of "starving or freezing to death" are tenants and therefor it is the responsibility of the homeowners to upgrade their fire alarms.
Elderly and disabled already qualify for free smoke alarms from SFRS. Have had personal experience of this.